In the note "Evils Imminent," Erik Larson writes "Beneath the gore and smoke and loam, this book is about the evanescence of life, and why some men choose to fill their brief allotment of time engaging the impossible, others in the manufacture of sorrow" [xi]. What does the book reveal about "the ineluctable conflict between good and evil"? What is the essential difference between men like Daniel Burnham and Henry H. Holmes? Are they alike in any way?
Behind the doors, something unimaginable is always waiting for discovery. As Erik Larson fills his pages of the projects his characters were involved in, his details of the characters themselves set an overall tone in “the Devil in the White City
In the vaguest way possible, readers may describe Daniel Burnham as an architect, and H.H. Holmes a killer. Although one would never think to compare the two, Larson juxtaposes them to show how oddly they appeared to be the same. However, their essential similarities are only set apart by whether the men took a position of ‘good’ or ‘evil’ morals.
Both unmistakably brilliant and creative, the ideas of Burnham and Holmes were impossible. Burnham was an extraordinary architect. He, along side his partner, Root, basically revolutionized modern architecture with their discovery of how to successfully build skyscrapers. In building the World’s Fair, he made many of the most important decisions in drafting and constructing. Burnham’s buildings were to be known historically for their spot-on details, as well as overall brilliance. But how could a doctor, nothing of an architect, build something so equally complex? Holmes drafted and designed his own building, with the intention of killing. Although on the outside, it was to blend in like any other building, Holmes created an intricate design of secret passageways and special chutes, including a large sound-proof vault, and even a furnace. And not only did Holmes build these custom pieces; he did so by means of scamming, and got away with it without any question.
Just looking at both of the men’s achievements, in a broad perspective (overlooking the fact that Holmes murdered many people,) the projects of these men proved to require immense creativity, thought, as well as a good sense of reaction. Both men obviously held these important qualities, as the World’s Fair and the many murders of Holmes were carried out successfully. Both men had sought to do something incredible; something that had never been seen nor done before, although one man only aspired to out-do a past event, as the other man simply enjoyed ending the lives of others. Through their creative ways, one for the good of others, the other cunning and deceitful, has thus brought before the reader, one of the greatest architects of America
The symbolism Larson presents through Burnham and the good, versus Holmes and the evil, draws attention back to how to tell the comparisons apart. Obviously Burnham simply gets grouped into the “good” because his creativity was to be used for the benefit of the many people that would get to experience the Fair. Whereas Holmes is categorized into the “evil” as his creativity was to be implied in his own greedy schemes, not to mention the fact that his intentions were to kill, which provided no benefit whatsoever to anyone.
With regards to the statement that the paths of the good and the evil inevitably cross, readers may agree that without one, there is no other. Without the villain, there is no hero. Without Burnham and his creation of the extravagant fair, Holmes may not have been successful in carrying out his dirty operations. That is to say that readers may interpret Larson’s choice for a title, “Evil’s Imminent” to be a foreshadowing of the dangers that could inevitably be set forth, whether certain events occurred or not.
No comments:
Post a Comment